Aikido against a boxer

[Buka]

Do not box with a boxer - unless you're the better boxer.

Ever see a boxer work on sweeps? Ever see a boxer work on throws from a clinch? Ever see boxers work on break falls? Even a simple break fall?

Keep that in mind when dealing with boxers.

I love boxing, trained it a lot. But I'd never rely on it in a fight. Not by itself.

 

[lianxi]

Buka - OK, you have me interested the way you supported boxing, but seem to consider it incomplete, so what else would you consider using in a real fight?

 

[Encho]

OK. Here is my theory. You have 90% of fighting and 10% of fighting.

90% is being able to impose your will on another person. So the BJJer who can grab a boxer and tie him up or the boxer who can KTFO the BJJer. This is the bare essentials of self defence.

The other 10% is multiple attackers, weapons, fighting in a car or on stairs. All that sexy street stuff.

Without that 90% the 10% is useless.

So the idea that while Aikido can't defeat one boxer but will suddenly rise to the challenge of three guys with weapons.

Is pretty ambitious.

Aikido comes from daito ryu, the idea is if a guy comes at you with a sword you can disarm his sword and stab him and cut his head off. The art was designed to deal with battlefield and historical Japanese period weapons which would make bjj useless in medieval Japan.

 

[Encho]

Buka - OK, you have me interested the way you supported boxing, but seem to consider it incomplete, so what else would you consider using in a real fight?

I started off boxing from a golden glove champion it's a great art if you and your opponent are throwing punches, however, against a trained grappler who knows how to close the gap, or a kick boxer who knows how to roundhouse legs or an escrimador who knows how to use a stick it becomes incomplete in that area.

 

[Buka]

Lianxi, I like to rush, closing distance, because it's something that I do well. People don't usually handle being rushed well. And, yes, there's a danger of eating one on the way in - but as I said, I rush well.

I use my head well and my elbows well. Some boxers do that, too, might very well be where I first learned how.

And, again, I love boxing. It teaches you how to fight, but just as a boxer. Translates well to self defense - unless you get swept, grabbed, taken down, thrown, head locked, bear hugged, picked up, mounted etc. Then, not so much.

 

[drop bear]

It's not a drill, the techniques can be effective if used properly, but I don't personally think that was ever the point. It's an entire system of body movement...I will concede that the way it is trained today, leaves a bit to be desired.

And you are not seeking to companion it with anything?

So then you could aikido boxers or whatever. If your guys were also boxers.

 

[drop bear]

I think I've talked about this before. The issue is (for straight Aikido - where the focus is training aiki methods only), if your partner knows how it works (even vaguely), the counters are pretty easy. It all starts with never reaching for the long attack (no overhand right, for instance, which is usually thrown for range). If you bring strikes and some of the Judo-style push-pull (like you see in Shotokan Aikido tournaments), it can adapt to sparring, and to skilled/controlled fighters.

If you can't spar. You are never even going to see that overhand right. Overextended or otherwise.

You can't actually properly explore the concepts you are trying to develop unless you leave the art and do a different art.

It is the definition of dry land swimming.

Which is fine if you companion it with something. Or drill some other mechanic

But I don't see a lot of aikidokas wrestling.

 

[drop bear]

Aikido comes from daito ryu, the idea is if a guy comes at you with a sword you can disarm his sword and stab him and cut his head off. The art was designed to deal with battlefield and historical Japanese period weapons which would make bjj useless in medieval Japan.

Go find a friend and give them a nerf bat. Not a trained martial arts friend, just anyone.

Tell them to wack you as hard as they can with that bat.

Then take it off them without it even touching you.

There is no style designed to take a sword off a swordsman who wants to kill you with it.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Okay, having been a boxer back when I was young and in the military, and now being a long term Aikidoka, and BJJ student, I think I might offer some perspective. Aikido isn't designed for sparring. I'm sorry, it just isn't. Here's why. Aikido NEEDS a committed attack. If you are not willing to step into your punch and commit, I can't affect your kuzushi and/or disrupt your center. It's ancestor worked great on the battlefield, where soldiers committed to their attacks (often with weapons). Aikido works well against the guy in the bar who just took a full swing at you with a pool cue....or the guy trying to smash you in the face with a bottle. One on one against a trained fighter? Not the best choice. Here's the thing. NO art is perfect...none. In a one on one sparring/sporting match, BJJ, Judo, Wrestling, Boxing, MMA, are all far, far better choices than Aikido. But how about against multiple attackers? How about against weapons? In Aikido we always, ALWAYS assume 2 things. 1. The attacker has a weapon....it could be a brick, a baseball bat, a knife, etc., we assume they have something. 2. They have friends. It won't be a one on one fight. In those situations, not that they are ideal for ANY martial art, Aikido is probably a better choice than any of the above...why? Because we actually train against multiple attackers, and against weapons all the time. I've been training BJJ for awhile now as well....have never trained for EITHER of those things in BJJ.

So, if a boxer wanted to probe and throw some jabs....a real Aikido practitioner wouldn't do anything...they would just back up out of range, and wait for the boxer to step in and commit. Which won't work well. It's akin to asking why your championship rally car isn't able to race against formula one cars on a formula one track and win? Different arts with different purposes. YMMV.

OK. Here is my theory. You have 90% of fighting and 10% of fighting.

90% is being able to impose your will on another person. So the BJJer who can grab a boxer and tie him up or the boxer who can KTFO the BJJer. This is the bare essentials of self defence.

The other 10% is multiple attackers, weapons, fighting in a car or on stairs. All that sexy street stuff.

Without that 90% the 10% is useless.

So the idea that while Aikido can't defeat one boxer but will suddenly rise to the challenge of three guys with weapons.

Is pretty ambitious.

Drop bear has it. I have practiced using my BJJ against weapons and multiple attackers. I don’t spend a lot of time on it because the fundamentals of being able to control someone are what makes it work. There are some specifics which have to change for weapons and multiples, but the biggest thing is being able to change your tactical mindset.

 

[drop bear]

Drop bear has it. I have practiced using my BJJ against weapons and multiple attackers. I don’t spend a lot of time on it because the fundamentals of being able to control someone are what makes it work. There are some specifics which have to change for weapons and multiples, but the biggest thing is being able to change your tactical mindset.

As a side note about one of the interesting ironies of being tactically prepared for multiple attackers is that your work rate has has to out strip theirs. Because they quite simply are in a more efficient position.

So quite often a fun question to ask a person who trains multiples is "what is your cardio like?"

 

[Spinedoc]

And you are not seeking to companion it with anything?

So then you could aikido boxers or whatever. If your guys were also boxers.

I study BJJ, have studied Judo, boxed, etc. I think Aikido has made all of that better. I'm already progressing faster in my BJJ studies BECAUSE of my Aikido. YMMV.

 

[Spinedoc]

Also, I would add that some of us do spar. It's not common in Aikido, and you have to use atemi extensively, but you can spar, it's just not really built for that and most Aikidoka won't ever do it. Most don't care if they know how to fight or not, and will tell you that is not why they do Aikido. But, some of the other senior students and I will occasionally use the open mat and play around with different attacks, responses, actual full on strikes....the distance and timing get crazy. Just because I said it wasn't designed for sparring, does not mean you cannot or should not spar....just so I make myself clear.

 

[drop bear]

I study BJJ, have studied Judo, boxed, etc. I think Aikido has made all of that better. I'm already progressing faster in my BJJ studies BECAUSE of my Aikido. YMMV.

Yeah. But you then need at least one other person who can judo or wrestle so that you can practice aikido. Aikido becomes the worst people to train Aikido with.

So I would have thought Aikido plus something else would have to come as standard.

From what you are saying you only seem to be training half of aikido.

As if say I only wanted to be a blocking specialist. I can't train with other blocking specialists. I have to train with a striker.

 

[Spinedoc]

Yeah. But you then need at least one other person who can judo or wrestle so that you can practice aikido. Aikido becomes the worst people to train Aikido with.

So I would have thought Aikido plus something else would have to come as standard.

From what you are saying you only seem to be training half of aikido.

As if say I only wanted to be a blocking specialist. I can't train with other blocking specialists. I have to train with a striker.

I can see your point. The head of my dojo, a godan in Aikido, also has yudansha ranking in Karate. He said he spent more than a decade trying to get Aikidoka to become better strikers and to learn how to strike and kick properly. He finally gave up. Said that none of them have any interest in it, don't care, won't practice it, etc. He says even today that the average Aikido student "can't strike for ****". The only exceptions being some of us who have a background in a striking art. Even then, with the rare exception of a couple of guys, I can't go full speed.....they don't know how to handle it, and would just find someone else to partner up with. That being said, I understand now that the Aikido is a system of movement, designed to make my other skills better. At least, that's where I am at with it.

 

[drop bear]

Also, I would add that some of us do spar. It's not common in Aikido, and you have to use atemi extensively, but you can spar, it's just not really built for that and most Aikidoka won't ever do it. Most don't care if they know how to fight or not, and will tell you that is not why they do Aikido. But, some of the other senior students and I will occasionally use the open mat and play around with different attacks, responses, actual full on strikes....the distance and timing get crazy. Just because I said it wasn't designed for sparring, does not mean you cannot or should not spar....just so I make myself clear.

It is not so much knowing how to fight as understanding the art you are doing.

Which I have no idea how you could gain any sort of knowledge as to how it works at all.

 

[Jaeimseu]

I don’t know if this has been posted already, but it was pretty interesting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Do not box with a boxer - unless you're the better boxer.

Ever see a boxer work on sweeps? Ever see a boxer work on throws from a clinch? Ever see boxers work on break falls? Even a simple break fall?

Keep that in mind when dealing with boxers.

I love boxing, trained it a lot. But I'd never rely on it in a fight. Not by itself.

One of my early instructors was a Golden Gloves boxer, and held rank in two grappling arts and one striking art. His primary tenet was not to box with a boxer, nor grapple with a grappler.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Lianxi, I like to rush, closing distance, because it's something that I do well. People don't usually handle being rushed well. And, yes, there's a danger of eating one on the way in - but as I said, I rush well.

I use my head well and my elbows well. Some boxers do that, too, might very well be where I first learned how.

And, again, I love boxing. It teaches you how to fight, but just as a boxer. Translates well to self defense - unless you get swept, grabbed, taken down, thrown, head locked, bear hugged, picked up, mounted etc. Then, not so much.

I think the fighting aspect - getting used to hitting and getting hit, the strategy of boxing, etc. - makes a fantastic foundation to work from. A boxer with something to fill the gaps you mention is a formidable fighter.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If you can't spar. You are never even going to see that overhand right. Overextended or otherwise.

You can't actually properly explore the concepts you are trying to develop unless you leave the art and do a different art.

It is the definition of dry land swimming.

Which is fine if you companion it with something. Or drill some other mechanic

But I don't see a lot of aikidokas wrestling.

Again, as Spinedoc said, I think it was intended to be an add-on, a refinement. If you already spar, already know how to read those punches, Aikido makes a nice new set of tools to work with. Doing it the other way around (leaving Aikido to pick up that foundation) is the long way around, IMO.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Drop bear has it. I have practiced using my BJJ against weapons and multiple attackers. I don’t spend a lot of time on it because the fundamentals of being able to control someone are what makes it work. There are some specifics which have to change for weapons and multiples, but the biggest thing is being able to change your tactical mindset.

Multiples has some different tactics, but the same fundamentals - just an add-on to the base, as you say. You could train it endlessly, but there's a definite point of diminishing return on it, and perhaps a point of negative return if you're taking time away from fundamentals. Much the same with weapons, though that approach can be integrated more - the training assumption that there's always a weapon causes some subtle changes in approach that are not time-intensive if they are treated as the standard.